| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Moslem Immigrants’ Guidelines Obeying and Betraying Their Host Country |
| 2004-05-08 |
| So what are the original rules of Muslims and non-Muslims? When speaking about security, we know that the one who is giving security is always more powerful/stronger than the one accepting to be under covenant. Where Dar ul Islam [Tyranny of Islam] is giving a covenant to non-Muslims, it means that Islam is in power and has authority, and the Muslims lay down the conditions for the covenant. There are different forms of Covenant. ..... However, in today’s reality it is essential to study the covenant where non-Muslims have power: AMAAN UL MUSLIM Covenant of security for a Muslim from non-Muslims. .... Why would Muslims need covenant from the kuffar? Muslims may be facing persecution, like from the taghout rulers today, like King Fahd etc, and for this reason they may go to a non-Muslim country for protection/Asylum, .... However that does not mean that we have to accept everything that they impose on us, like their law and order.... ... when the kuffar are in authority, and we (the Muslims) are weak, they look to us as people that have no sanctity, and the only way they will allow you to live with them, is via a covenant - i.e. to have an agreement not to violate the sanctity of each other. ... For us today where there is no dar ul Islam, and there is only taghout rulers oppressing the Muslims everywhere, we are in a position where we are persecuted and oppressed, and it may be necessary to live under covenant in non-Muslim countries. .... When you enter into a country, you do not enter declaring jihad on them, rather you ask for security and protection. People that are entering into a country - speak politely and carefully asking to be permitted by them to enter into the country. They apply for ’Asylum’ or a ’visa’ etc in order to be permitted by them to enter into their country without being arrested etc. This is a covenant where they (the kuffar) give you clear verbal or written permission to enter and stay in their country. This is the clearest form of covenant ... When you enter, you state to them clearly on demand what the purpose of your entrance into the country is; whether you say "to study", "to work", "for security" or for other reasons, nobody however says, "to fight" or to "wage jihad" etc. Another reality is that, if you have entered to study/work etc, and you have stayed there, lived there and have had children, you can have a covenant even by simply getting a driving licence, or taking benefits etc.This is because by obtaining a driving licence you are getting their assurance that you can live and drive freely with the security that you will not be arrested by them and they have agreed. - This is a form of customary covenant . When a Muslim enters a non-Muslim country with a covenant of security, he/she has agreed not to violate the sanctity of the other party (i.e. the government or ruler), and that they will not violate yours. The government however represents all of the other people and so the covenant is applicable to all the people, and so you cannot kill or steal from anybody in that country, while you are under covenant. ... those Muslims abroad who are not under any covenant with the non-muslims, have every right to act and fight for sake of Allah (swt). But those Muslims living in the west must never betray the covenant .... There are four main realities of people living in the west: 1- COVENANT BY OBTAINING A LEGITIMATE PASSPORT: Anybody who has obtained a legitimate passport is under covenant, this reality is of the one who enters or has a passport: i. In their own real name, ii. And it says that they are a Muslim, iii. If they do so, they are obliged to abide by the covenant 2- COVENANT BY OWNING AN ILLEGITIMATE PASSPORT: Anyone who has a fake or illegitimate passport: i. With a false (even a kafir) name, ii. But it says that he is a Muslim, iii. In this case, the covenant is still binding on him 3- COVENANT WITH NO DOCUMENTS: i.e. He smuggles himself in without any documents: i. However he says that he is Muslim - ii. Then in this case, the covenant is binding on him. 4- NO COVENANT: the only way to be living in the west without covenant: i. It is ONLY the one who enters with a kafir name, ii. And claims that he is kafir, iii. And does not inform them or show them at all of his reality, iv. But rather says that he is one of them Then It is allowed, but only on the condition that he is sent by Amir ul Mu’mineen to act as a Mujahid for the benefit of the Muslims, in this case there is NO sanctity for the life or wealth of the kuffar at all. We should note that ALL of the magnificent 19 MARTYRS (inshaa Allah) on 11 September entered America like this, they did not betray any covenant, however for anyone living in the west, it would not be permissible for them to do the same act because they DO have a covenant of security. .... Regarding this Imam Shafi’i said: "If a group of Muslims, imitate the Romans, and wear their clothes, and enter saying that they are going to be one of them and fight with them against Muslims, and they accept, it is allowed for them to kill them because they are at war with Islam and Muslims." .... Abdullah ibn Unais had gone to the enemy, saying that he is one of them and that he was going to them in order to increase their numbers, and then when he was inside with them, he killed them. And for this action, the Messenger (saw) said that he saw him in paradise, and called him Mutakhassir fil Jannah. .... These kuffar were killed in this kind of Assassination. This is the only time and way that you can do so, you cannot act like a kafir, except in war and ONLY in war, as long as you do not say ANY SHIRK. .... HOW TO LEAVE THE COVENANT: There are three mechanisms 1- THE COVENANT IS NO LONGER VALID, WHEN THE TIME LIMIT IS FINISHED 2- DECLARE THAT YOU DO NOT WANT TO STAY, AND THEN LEAVE THE COUNTRY 3- IF YOU ARE BETRAYED BY THE ONE WHO YOU HAVE COVENANT WITH This does not mean that you can kill and steal as you like, you must leave the country first, Imam Shafi’i said: "If a group of Muslims enter Dar ul Harb [Land Free of Islam Tyranny], and the enemy from them is secure (i.e. they have covenant) until they leave or are betrayed, and if the enemy take into captivity any children or women, although I do not like the betrayal of the enemy, it is not allowed to betray them. The Muslims must go out and then return to fight and release them." It could be asked, If you enter with covenant, must you obey the law of the land? NO, the covenant does not oblige that, it is specifically a covenant of security of life and wealth, and nothing else. it is a contract only to maintain sanctity for life and wealth, You must always follow the Shari’ah, and never follow kufr law. Regardless of what they ask of you, you cannot give up Islam or disobey Allah, nor use the covenant of security as an excuse to do so, even if they attempt to stipulate such conditions in your covenant. .... The haram conditions here makes the contract fasid, as the weaker party in the covenant you can just ignore the condition, if you were the stronger party, you would have to fix the fasad. however as long as the subject matter of the contract is halal, then the other conditions will not invalidate it, but will only make it fasid (incomplete). As Muslims we must obey Allah, even if it goes against ’logic’ or ’ration’, and we should not have emotions except in accordance to the shari’ah, although we may feel angered at the continual betrayal of the kuffar and their murderous war on Islam and Muslims, we must respond according to that which pleases Allah (swt), ...it is not possible to fight Jihad except to please Allah (swt), if we do so for our own sake, or our own revenge or to relieve our own personal anger instead of to make Allah’s word the highest, we would merely be risking being doomed in the hellfire and would be wasting our time and disobeying Allah (swt). |
| Posted by:Mike Sylwester |
| #6 Lol! As a programmer, I can appreciate the truth table they have carefully drawn up .com any chance of drawing up that truth table as an aid to those of us (well certainly me) who are perplexed by Islamic jurisprudence? |
| Posted by: tipper 2004-05-08 10:47:50 PM |
#5 It could be asked, If you enter with covenant, must you obey the law of the land?Good enough for me. Throw 'em all out! |
| Posted by: Old Grouch 2004-05-08 2:23:43 PM |
| #4 It looks like a Wahhabi site of the pro-jihad type. It does not apply to most Muslims. All Moslems, however, must be held suspect in the eyes of rational people. The reason is that some of them are terrorists or pro-terrorist religious leaders. The others are susceptible to being physically intimidated by the radical minority into doing things against liberal democracy. No Moslem should be allowed to immigrate. Cut off all immigration from Muslim nations. For those who are already here, they must either assimilate or face social repression. Multiculturalism = suicide. |
| Posted by: Old Guy 2004-05-08 1:28:18 PM |
| #3 Lol! As a programmer, I can appreciate the truth table they have carefully drawn up, but it's not up to them - it's up to us whom we do or don't allow to immigrate. This presumes some modicum of control over our borders, hint, hint. As an open liberal society, we should demand assimilation and utterly peaceful tolerance of others. Our civil & criminal laws can handle the second part. The immigrant's economic prosperity hinges upon the first. Nothing less should be accepted to get in or to stay in -- and remain free / alive, as the case demands. Just my 2 cents. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-05-08 1:14:57 PM |
| #2 It's not bullshit. It is very cleverly exploiting the weaknesses of liberal democracies to conquer and covert them by non-violent means. It is a threat to the Republic. |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-05-08 12:52:41 PM |
| #1 just plain bullshit --- go to another country respect thier laws and traditions -- regardless--end of story..... |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-05-08 12:39:32 PM |